Yes, you can get more out of the PS4's CPU than you can the Xbox's.
I assume that statement is irrespective of the benchmark employed?
Yes, you can get more out of the PS4's CPU than you can the Xbox's.
Buying a system for "only exclusive games" is what Nintendo enjoyed with the Gamecube as well as the Wii-U. Not sure that's a good thing.
MS messed up by not catering to the millions of people that made Xbox a household name by wanting a powerhouse of a console.
That looks soooo bad. Could they not have tried another take?
They would just lie.I don't believe any of this. Can we get confirmation from Penello and Major Nelson?
Albert Penello lied to us.
I am shocked.
Albert Penello said:We have at least 10% more CPU. Not only a faster processor, but a better audio chip also offloading CPU cycles.
It was a Panello reference )That isn't even a good thing, Valve has said while porting games to Linux that OpenGL is much more efficient than DirectX.
MS is nowhere as near fucked as Nintendo for 3rd party support. Multiplatform games will still come to Xbone.Buying a system for "only exclusive games" is what Nintendo enjoyed with the Gamecube as well as the Wii-U. Not sure that's a good thing.
Wow. I wonder if this is because of virtualization overhead...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80951633&postcount=195
Albert Penello strikes again. MS math etc etc.
I'm not really surprised by this to be honest, which is why I called Albert out when he made that statement about the CPU despite the PS4 info being unpublished.
So what angle can we still spin into the favor of xbox? Shape?
Buying a system for "only exclusive games" is what Nintendo enjoyed with the Gamecube as well as the Wii-U. Not sure that's a good thing.
MS messed up by not catering to the millions of people that made Xbox a household name by wanting a powerhouse of a console.
Games my friend, games.
considering how weak it is, kinect-less Xbone should be priced around $299
But Xbox has no where near the same 3rd party support problems.
If you say so...
virtualization of what?
So MS has the slower console yet they have the bigger case and external PSU?
Those MS engineers really worked hard on this one.
considering how weak it is, kinect-less Xbone should be priced around $299
As much as I asked yesterday why there was no battery indicator, vibration off option on the dashboard ans no space used display for xbone. There is still no way for me to play the next alan wake on anything other than xbone.
That reason alone will stop me selling it and keeping my PS4 only.
by your logic the wii-u should be priced at $50.
by your logic the wii-u should be priced at $50.
It was their decision to make something that won't be losing them truckloads of money yes. Because that's what they'd have to do if they wanted to improve on PS4 hardware wise while not charging more money for it.in reality it's not really hard to improve on the PS4 hardware wise, so it was MS's decision to make the XO weaker no doubt about it.
175MHz for the CPU. The 53MHz relates to the GPU.
Still, it makes no difference in the age of GPU compute. Both CPUs are very weak, around the same power as what is expected from top line mobile processors in 2014.
14mb/s vs 12mb/s is a decent difference per second. These CPU's are better than you think or alot of people think, they may not be i7's but they do not need to be, they are DEDICATED cpu's with alot of the consoles primary workload put onto the GPU's (of which the PS4 had significant compute) 8 Cores * 2ghz = is decent (albeit 1/2 likely reserved for OS)
Last Gen 360 had a 3 Core 3.2ghz... do the math.
I don't believe any of this. Can we get confirmation from Penello and Major Nelson?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80951633&postcount=195
Albert Penello strikes again. MS math etc etc.
I'm not really surprised by this to be honest, which is why I called Albert out when he made that statement about the CPU despite the PS4 info being unpublished.
To be fair, by all accounts the XBO is noticeably quieter than the PS4 (not that the latter is loud, just louder). So there's that, and... that's pretty much it. In every other way the PS4 certainly looks like a significantly better designed machine.
virtualization of what?
I'm curious, did he ever post again after the console releases and the performance difference became a stone hard fact?
$99.99 would be quite a sweet spot for that console. Or maybe $129.99.by your logic the wii-u should be priced at $50.
I think the greater likelihood is that the PS4 has less cores reserved for the OS. GopherD said they were aiming for less than 1 core.
And one of the most expensive and celebrated desktop CPUs is failing to even be 100% more faster than those slow mobile CPUs.
by your logic the wii-u should be priced at $50.
I don't recall MS saying that their CPU was faster than PS4s, just that it was faster than it used to be. I think fans came up with that by using the 1.6 from the rumors/leaks. I could be wrong. Anyway, this is cool, thanks for posting.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80951633&postcount=195• We have at least 10% more CPU. Not only a faster processor, but a better audio chip also offloading CPU cycles.
So Xbox is behind in literally every category now. That's amazing MS let that happen.
Well it's the reason I bought an OG Xbox as my primary. It's also the reason I bought a 360 as my primary. So I do say so.
It was their decision to make something that won't be losing them truckloads of money yes. Because that's what they'd have to do if they wanted to improve on PS4 hardware wise while not charging more money for it.
What does this mean?
How could you believe anything they say?
People DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard APIs that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we dont know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way were giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference it would be obvious.
virtualization of what?
I'm curious, did he ever post again after the console releases and the performance difference became a stone hard fact?
Is it? I haven't played an Xbone, but my PS4 is dead quiet.
virtualization of what?
Better CPU? Nope.
Shape? TrueAudio.
Quieter? Nope (I think Anand measured PS4 to be quieter actually, I might be wrong)
And millions of other people bought previous Xbox consoles (as well as previous Playstation consoles for that matter since the past 3 didn't have the best looking multiplats) due to games & features.
So yes, gamers buy consoles for different personal reasons which (surprisingly) some don't seem to understand.
And no, your PS4 isn't "dead quiet". It couldn't possibly be, it has a fan running at all times after all. Maybe you meant to say that you don't notice it over the game audio, which I'd be more inclined to believe.
That means that the evidence for a 1,8Ghz-clock was probably correct. (We had that one slide that was considered relatively trustworthy, forgot about the source).
7 cores @ 1,8Ghz seems to fit those benchmarks.
Don't read too much into it.